As three sisters in a highly-conservative society of Haryana, known for dictates of Khap Panchayats against women, took the courage to demand their share in ancestral property, the Supreme Court has come to their aid by restoring their case dismissed by the Punjab and Haryana high court merely because they were late by 63 days to file an appeal.
A bench of Justices A.K. Ganguly and Gyan Sudha Misra brushed aside the technical objections raised by the HC to deny them the right to fight for their right.
“We cannot accept this view taken by the high court. The delay of 63 days is not a delay for a long period and there has been some explanation given by the three ladies,” the top court said while restoring their appeal before the HC.
They had sought their 3/9th share of the ancestral property declare them as absolute owner of the part of their share, taken away entirely by their only brother. The three are among the nine siblings — eight daughters and a son — born to their parents.
Their parents had died after getting six of the daughters married leaving behind the three in the care of their only brother. But they were not satisfied with the treatment meted to them by him and took the courage to demand their share and when refused, filed a suit for division of the property in 2003.
The three sisters, led by the youngest Poonam, the only literate among them, had sought to restrain their brother Harish Kumar from “interfering” with their peaceful possession of their share, which was their birthright. The brother had contested their claim on the ground that the property was self-acquired by father, who had executed a ‘Will’ in his favour before his death thus giving him “absolute ownership” of the entire property.
The trial court had passed a decree in favour of the brother, as the three sisters could not lead any evidence to establish their claim. They later challenged the verdict in the court of the district judge, Ambala, which refused to entertain their appeal declaring it as time-barred by 63 days.
The sisters pleaded before the district judge that they could not lead the evidence in the civil court because the youngest sister Poonam who was the only literate among the three and pursuing the case, fell critically ill and could not pursue it with their counsel. “The counsel never informed them for giving their evidence in the court, which resulted in the dismissal of the case on December 2006. They were only informed about the civil court order by one of their neighbour in February 2007,” the apex court said.